I was wrong to presume that CNN represents mainstream coverage. They have fallen off the deep end. I did not make things up out of whole cloth ad you stated.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Twitter Executives Detail Plans For Widespread Political Censorship (1/24 19:48 PST) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter GordonGekko
- Start date
I consider CNN fairly mainstream. I'm willing to accept a CNN link as proof of your claim. Got one?
Simply put, I don't believe you. I don't believe that any mainstream news source presented as fact that Ashli Babbitt was killed by the insurgents.
While I'm at it, here is a CNN link from Jan 7 clearly stating that Ashli Babbitt was shot by police.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/capitol-mob-deaths/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/capitol-mob-deaths/index.html
squistion
Footballguy
He will probably say that doesn't count, because it wasn't what he saw in the period of "about an hour" that he watched CNN on Jan 6 or in the Facebook posts he read.
Still trying to help. Here is a video from CNN where they note that the woman who was shot has died. They are quite careful to not state facts that aren't currently known. The reporter states the woman was shot and that she has died. The reporter does not at any time state or imply that the woman (Ms. Babbitt) was killed by insurgents.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/06/death-capitol-riots-washington-dc-congress-electoral-college-vpx.cnn
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/06/death-capitol-riots-washington-dc-congress-electoral-college-vpx.cnn
Last edited by a moderator:
Mile High
Footballguy
That would be pretty hard to believe since there was video of she being shot as she was trying to climb thought a broken panel in the door.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I like it. All states should do this.
And good for DeSantis. Maybe he makes my short list for eligible POTUS's now.
Sea Duck
Footballguy
First Amendment Rights For Me, But Not For Thee.I like it. All states should do this.
And good for DeSantis. Maybe he makes my short list for eligible POTUS's now.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Neither does he. The Government has been regulating corporations for hundreds of years.I have no idea what you mean by this.
Mile High
Footballguy
Yeah I don't think Florida is going to be able to collect on any of that 100k per day idea.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
dawgtrails
Footballguy
Because it is blatantly and laughably unconstitutional.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/gov-desantiss-proposed-laws-penalizing-social-media-companies-for-de-platforming-politicians-is-hilariously-unconstitutional/
“Governor DeSantis’ proposal is neither novel nor constitutional. It raises the same issue as a previous Florida law which required newspapers that criticized a political candidate to publish that candidates response,” First Amendment attorney Ari Cohn said in an email to Law&Crime.
That 1974 case, Miami Herald v. Tornillo, was cited by all three experts Law&Crime contacted.
“The Supreme Court struck down the law, ruling that it violated the newspapers’ First Amendment right to choose which content to run or not run,” Cohn said. “In invalidating that law, the Court expressly rejected the very same argument people make for regulating content moderation today: that concentration of ownership and ‘monopoly of the means of communication’ justifies forcing private parties to carry certain speech. But the Court found it unconstitutional then, and it remains unconstitutional now.”
Apple Jack
Footballguy
It's not about politics, but way to stay on brand with the victim complex gang.
Not to mention, the day after the law goes into effect, Twitter's terms of service will change to include language stating that the user agrees to have their account temporarily suspended while they are a candidate for office in Florida.
GordonGekko
Footballguy
dawgtrails said:
That's not the pathway De Santis will take.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2019, that public officials cannot block critics/detractors from their social media pages, as these constitute "public forums"
You aren't just removing the politician's ability to speak to the public, but also the public from speaking to the politician.
The other issue that won't be spoken out loud, but will come into play, is that false missile alert in Hawaii. If you deplatform politicians, you remove a pathway for critical information to reach the public.
Let's say there is a large scale terrorist attack, God forbid, and it's localized in a specific city. If social media has pulled the pin on the Mayor or member of Congress or etc, etc, etc, then you've just put human lives at risk.
Facebook has a content moderation site in Florida. De Santis doesn't care about the fines, he wants a legal pathway to eventually storm the data center and pull everything in it as evidence. If internal data on the Facebook "Tasks" platform ( how all Big Social Media and Big Tech essentially coordinate their decisions in lock step) gets compromised, you've got them for anti-trust issues. Once you have that, and you get into their books, now you'll likely get the heavy hitters for tax fraud/tax evasion. The spiral from that point could be endless. You could get data that was intentionally turfed about cartel members talking about guns from the Operation Fast And Furious scandal, now you've got Eric Holder in the jackpot, now he's got motive to flip. You could get something from Donna Brazile when she ran the DNC. You could get who are the silent investors with Dominion's parent McCarthy Group.
De Santis wants to break Big Social Media. They are in his way and if he pulls it off, he has long lasting political legacy to drive him to POTUS.
Similar threads
